Canon Law

July 23, 2013

“Greek: Bishop Hosius said: This also let your sagacity
determine, that — inasmuch as this was decreed in order that a bishop might not
fall under censure by going to the Court— that if any have such petitions as we
mentioned above, they should send these by one of their deacons. For the person
of a subordinate does not excite jealousy, and what shall be granted [by the
Emperor] can thus be reported more quickly. All answered: Be this also decreed.

Latin: Bishop Hosius said: This also your forethought
should provide for— inasmuch as you have made this decree in order that the
audacity of bishops might not labour [or, be observed] to go to Court.
Whosoever therefore shall have or receive petitions such as we have mentioned
above, let them send these [each] by a deacon of his, because the person of a
minister is not an object of jealousy, and he will be able to report more
quickly what he has obtained.”

Pope St. Gregory I and the Deacon Peter from a manuscript at the Abbey of Monte Cassino.

Canon 8 of the Synod of
Sardica directs us to a diaconal function that seems for the most part to have
completely gone into abeyance. The
deacon functions according to this canon, as an ambassador or apokrisiarios for
his bishop at the Court of the Emperor in Constantinople. In the 5th century Justinian made
it a requirement that the bishops send ambassadors to the Court in order to
prevent them from neglecting the pastoral care of their flocks. Patriarchs and metropolitans also received aprokrisiarioi
especially from their suffragans. At
times this was a full time ministry for a deacon, for the most important
episcopal sees maintained residential ambassadors at the Court. Pope Gregory the Great when he was a deacon
represented the Church of Rome at the Court from about A.D. 578-86. The rational of this canon for appointing a
deacon to the position of ambassador appears to focus on the vice of
jealousy. It also protects the bishop
from the censure of the Court, something that might be less likely to fall upon
a deacon as the ambassador of his bishop.
This canon clearly puts a focus on the diakonos as one who gets
something done on behalf of another, one who acts as a messenger or
representative of another. This
understanding of the deacon could easily be recovered and the function restored,
so that a bishop or in most circumstances the parish priest if assisted by a
deacon, could be free to focus more on the ministries of the word and liturgy
and less on the administrative tasks of the diocese or parish.

July 22, 2013

A reader asked: Is it possible for a Latin Catholic to
become a subdeacon according the Eastern rite to serve the liturgy in a
monastery?

By: Protodeacon David Kennedy

His Grace Bishop Benedict is being vested for Vespers with the assistance of a subdeacon and a protodeacon. (St. Elias Church, Brampton: photo - M-L. Turi)

There is no one Eastern rite
Catholic Church but some twenty Eastern Catholic Churches sui iuris, each having its own canon law. Among the canonical Orthodox there are many
more than twenty Churches or canonical jurisdictions, each having its own canon
law in regards to the subdiaconate.

While
there is no strict uniformity in the Eastern Catholic and Orthodox Churches in
regards to minor orders, the subdiaconate exists as a minor order.

In
the Byzantine rite, the subdiaconate is conferred usually during the Pontifical
Divine Liturgy, after the vesting of the bishop but before he washes his hands,
as the hand washing will be the first liturgical duty of the newly ordained
subdeacon.

Byzantine
Catholic bishops usually require laymen who desire to be ordained subdeacons to
successfully complete a training program.
In the Ukrainian Catholic Eparchy of Toronto a candidate must be
recommend by his pastor and take a part-time one-year training course.

March 13, 2013

"If any one be baptized when he is ill, forasmuch as his
[profession of] faith was not voluntary, but of necessity [i.e. though fear of
death] he cannot be promoted to the presbyterate, unless on account of his
subsequent [display of] zeal and faith, and because of a lack of men."

(Archdeacon Andrei Mazur reading the diptychs at the Great Praises during Pontifical Divine Liturgy. This occurs just before the diaconal ecphoneis unto ages of ages, prior to Holy God.)

It is somewhat puzzling that this canon
that makes no direct reference to the diaconate or deacons, appears in the
footnotes. Why is it there, and how is
it related to the matter at hand? The
canon addresses the situation in which one enters life in Christ by baptism
when ill out of fear of death. During
this time period, it was not uncommon for many to postpone baptism for years,
as baptism required a radical change in life style. It required death to the
old Adam in order to live in Christ, the new Adam. Many where not willing to
commit to a life of non-violence, chastity, humility, meekness; a life of death
in Christ in order to rise with Christ.
Many where not willing to have an identity that says, I have been crucified with Christ; it is not
I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the
flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. (Gal.
2:20) Unwilling to make these words of the Apostle their own, they postponed
baptism till late in life and death-bed baptisms were not unknown.

This canon promotes prudence in choosing
the presbyters of the Church. No one
should be ‘promoted’ to the presbyterate unless he has demonstrated his
faith. Something much more is required
than baptism out of fear of death. One
must have a true and genuine desire to live life in Christ. One must come to Christ freely. Repentance should not be born out of fear but
out of an authentic desire to live in Christ. Thus, it is also necessary to be
seen to live a virtuous life and to avoid all vices. Time tests the believer.

Possibly, those who added this footnote to
Section 17 of Orientalium ecclesiarum
thought that nothing less should be required of candidates for the diaconate
than for those for the presbyterate. It
should be noted that in the early 4th century the diaconate had not
yet become a testing ground for the presbyterate. The diaconate was a permanent order. There was no need to progress through the
diaconate to the presbyterate. Direct
ordination to the presbyterate was the normal practice.

August 03, 2012

The primary rational that Orientalium ecclesiarum gives for the restoration of the diaconate in the Eastern Catholic Churches is “in order that the ancient legislation (discipline) concerning the sacrament of orders in the Eastern Churches may regain its force.” It is here that an examination of footnote no. 21 of the text needs to take place in order to gain an understanding of the phrase ‘ancient legislation’.

We will begin with Canon 18 of Nicaea (AD 325) that reads:

“It has come to the attention of this holy and great synod that in some places and cities deacons give communion to presbyters, although neither canon nor custom allows this, namely that those who have no authority to offer should give the body of Christ to those who do offer. Moreover it has become known that some of the deacons now receive the eucharist even before the bishops. All these practices must be suppressed. Deacons must remain within their own limits, knowing that they are the ministers of the bishop and subordinate to the presbyters. Let them receive the eucharist according to their order after the presbyters from the hands of the bishop or the presbyter. Nor shall permission be given for the deacons to sit among the presbyters, for such an arrangement is contrary to the canon and to rank. If anyone refuses to comply even after these decrees, he is to be suspended from the diaconate.”

According to Canon 18, the following practices must be addressed and corrected:

Deacons distributing communion to presbyters. (It mentions nothing of deacons distributing communion to bishops, although it seems that this would also be prohibited.)

Deacons receiving communion before bishops. (It corrects this abuse by stating that deacons are to receive communion after the presbyters.)

Deacons sitting among presbyters. (It is not explicitly clear if this is only a prohibition in liturgical assemblies or in all circumstances but given that the rest of the canon focuses on ‘communion’, it might be presumed that the context is liturgical.)

The rational for correcting these liturgical abuses are:

Deacons do not ‘offer’ the body of Christ. There is to be found in this canon a distinction in liturgical function or role between the deacon and the presbyter. Although the canon does not explicitly tell us what the deacon’s liturgical function is, (more about that below from G. Dix) it tells us that the function of the presbyter is to ‘offer’. There is a distinction between offering and receiving; and between offering and distributing.

This distinction can be found in the writings of St. Justin the Martyr, Apologia I (lxv): “When the president has given thanks and all the people have assented, those whom we call deacons give a portion of the bread over which thanksgiving has been offered, and of the wine and water, to each of those who are present; and they carry them away to those who are absent.” At the time of Justin did the deacons distribute the eucharist not only to the laity but also to the ‘president’ of the assembly? If so, is Nicaea prohibiting an early practice?

Robert Taft in his essay Receiving Communion – A Forgotten Symbol? draws our attention to the East-Syrian practice in the canonical collection of Gabriel of Basra near the end of the 9th century:

Question 19: When there is only one priest and one deacon, what should they do, for in one canon it prescribes that the deacon should not give communion to the priest?

Answer: In this matter the Catholicos Iso’yahb has determined as follows. It is not allowed that the deacon give communion to the priest, who is distinguished from the deacon by his higher rank. So if no other priest is there to give communion, but only a deacon, the situation should be handled according to a fine custom, namely: the priest takes the ‘coal’ [=consecrated particle] from the altar and put it in the hands of the deacon. Then he bows before the altar, takes the ‘coal’ from the deacon’s hands with the fingers of the right hand, places it on the tips of the two fingers of the left hand, and brings it back to his right palm. The deacon says only: ‘The Body of our Lord.’ Likewise the chalice: he gives it into the hands of the deacon, and after he has prostrated himself and bowed, he rises and takes the chalice with both hands, while the deacon holds the foot of the chalice with one hand. When the priest receives the deacon says: ‘The Blood of our Lord.’ Then the deacon puts the chalice on the altar…” (Beyond East and West. Washington: Pastoral Press. 1984. 105-106.)

Possibly, Gregory Dix can shed further light on Canon 18 in regards to the term ‘offer’.

“The Greek terminology concerning the oblation (prosphora) is through the pre-Nicene period quite clear, and does not (as a rule) vary from one writer to another. The communicant ‘brings’ (prosenegkein) the prosphora; the deacon ‘presents it or ‘brings it up’ (anapherein); the bishop ‘offers’ (prospherein) it. (Cf. Canons 1, 2 and 3 of the Council of Ancyra, c. AD 314). The prosphora itself is at all points ‘the gifts of Thy holy church’, but the ‘liturgies’ of each order in connection with it are proper to each order and not interchangeable. It is the special eucharistic ‘liturgy’ of each order which distinguishes it and constitutes it a separate ‘order’ in the organic Body of Christ.” (The Shape of the Liturgy. London: Dacre Press. 1970. 111-112.)

Each ‘order’ has its limits and it appears that deacons have assumed a ‘liturgy’ which is not their own, according to the canons or custom. Nicaea reflects an understanding of liturgy and orders that is organic and corporate. There is one body of the Church and it has a diversity of orders within it. Each order has its own functions and those functions are not to be assumed by another order.

Very importantly and something that can easily be missed in Canon 18 is that deacons are in a relationship to the bishop as his ministers. The principle is clear: one cannot be a deacon without being a deacon to someone, and in the Church one is a deacon because one is a diakonos (minister) of one’s bishop. But this is not the relationship that presbyters have to the bishop for the diakonoi are subject to the presbyters. Clearly Nicaea does not hold to the concept that presbyters are also deacons.

Where and with whom one sits sheds light upon one’s order in the Church. The presbyters form a college about the bishop, with the bishop as the head of that college. The bishop’s cathedra (chair of teaching) is to be found either in the eastern apse facing the assembly or on the solea in the nave facing the east. From here the bishop presides not only over the entire assembly of the Church but is seen physically as the head of the presbyteral college. The presbyters sit to the left and right of the bishop forming either a ‘U’ or semi-circle about him. The deacons stand, for by taking this posture, they can more easily fulfill their liturgical duties either as assistants to the bishop or keeping order in the liturgical assembly. The diakonoi relate to the bishop not as a college but individually, each one acting as designated by the bishop as an agent, intermediary, courier or assistant who gets something done at the command of the bishop.

Those deacons who will not conform to Canon 18 will be punished by suspension from the diaconate.

July 18, 2012

Section 17 of Orientalium ecclesiarum, (November 21, 1964)can be outlined in the following manner:

There is a “desire or a wish” on the part of the holy council/synod that the permanent diaconate be restored in the Eastern Catholic Churches.

The reason for this restoration is that the “ancient discipline/legislation concerning the sacrament of orders in the Eastern Churches may regain its force/flourish once more”.

There is a recognition that the permanent diaconate “has fallen into disuse”.

(Deacons in the Moscow Patriarchate before the iconostasis.Photo: partriarchia.ru)

Let us parse each of these points in order to obtain a clear understanding of the context of section 17. Point 3 is where this commentary will begin. When the council mentions that the permanent diaconate “has fallen into disuse” what is it referring to? While in the Western Catholic Church it was not possible canonically to serve in the diaconate without the explicit intention of receiving ordination to the presbyterate, thus there was only a transitional diaconate, such was not the case in the Eastern Catholic Churches. The canonical tradition had not eradicated the diaconate as a permanent order in the East as it had in the West. One of the Titles of Eastern Catholic canonical legislation, namely, Cleri sanctitati, which governed the Eastern Catholic Churches until the promulgation of the Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium, in Canons 60-77 sets forth explicitly the obligations of clerics, which includes reference to deacons who will remain in the diaconate for their life. Thus, at least in theory the diaconate remained a permanent order in the Eastern Catholic Churches as it also has with the Orthodox.

It can also be noted that the Latin word sacerdos found in these canons refers to all three degrees of the Sacrament of Holy Orders, namely episcopate, presbyterate and diaconate. This is certainly not the current language of the West where the diaconate is not considered part of the priesthood, yet the Orthodox Church still sees it as such. (Cf. John Chryssavgis. Remembering and Reclaiming Diakonia: The Diaconate Yesterday and Today. Brookline: Massachusetts. Holy Cross Orthodox Press. 2009; Boris Bobrinskoy. The Mystery of the Church: A Course in Orthodox Dogmatic Theology. Translated by Michael Breck. Yonkers: New York. St Vladimir’s Seminary Press. 2012. 213-216.)

The liturgical tradition in the Byzantine rite of the Catholic Church bears witness to this understanding also for we read in the Order for Setting Apart of a Reader or Cantor, “Son, the first degree of the priesthood is that of reader.” (Archieratikon, Rome. 1974. 229.) Thus, this is another interesting difference in the theology and practice of the Eastern Churches, and the current Roman Catholic understanding of the diaconate.

Robert Clément, S.J. writing in 1966 shortly after the promulgation of Orientalium ecclesiarum addresses the situation of the diaconate in both the Orthodox and Eastern Catholic Churches. (Cf. “Situation Présente du Diaconate en Orient” in P Winninger et Y. Congar. Le Diacre Dans L’Eglise et Le Monde D’aujourd’hui. Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf. 1966. 63-70.) He states that among the Chaldean Catholics there are 5 deacons and 3 for the Syrians. He mentions that among the Maronites deacons can be found in the monasteries but he gives no numbers. He mentions that in the Orthodox Church in Russia in 1914 there were 15,210 deacons, 50,150 presbyters and 149 bishops for 100 million faithful in 67 dioceses. Yet in the Orthodox Church in Greece, Clément tells us that it is rare to find deacons who will serve permanently in that order. There, deacons are awaiting ordination to the presbyterate or are found on the staff of bishops where they frequently go on to the episcopate itself; sometimes only a day or two after presbyteral ordination. We can easily see that among the Eastern Catholics and among some of the Orthodox that the diaconate as a permanent order “had fallen into disuse”.

(Polyeleos on the Feast of St. Sergius at the Trinity St. Sergius Lavra. Photo: patriarchia.ru)

Why was this the case? There seems to be a number of reasons.

When there is no remuneration for deacons as there is for presbyters, the diaconate as a permanent rank declines. The Russian Orthodox Church paid the deacons not only for their liturgical services but also had them employed as teachers of religion in the schools. In the Eastern Catholic Churches as in the Orthodox Church in Greece it was often difficult to find funding for priests let alone deacons.

The Eastern Catholic Churches adopted an educational paradigm for their clergy that was closely modeled after the Post-Tridentine practice as found in the Latin West. In this case the minor orders and the diaconate were conceived of and practiced solely as transitional steps to the real goal of the presbyterate.

Why be a deacon if you can be a priest? This mindset develops from number 2 above. The minor orders and the diaconate are seen as only canonical requirements for ordination to the presbyterate, and the canonical practice is no longer reflecting a period when the cursus honorum meant a real training period of many years in each of the minor orders and the diaconate. For example a man was not to be ordained a deacon before 25 years of age and not a presbyter before 30 years of age. Therefore, he would have at least 5 years of real diaconal service and training before ordination to the presbyterate. The cursushonorum existed as a functional training ground for clergy before the seminary system that followed the Council of Trent. But following Trent the training was shifted to the seminary and the cursus honorum lost its original raison d’être. This being the case, a man often spent very little time in the diaconate or any of the minor orders. The requirements became little more than legalistic that had little to do with real ecclesial life.

Number 3 above leads to a mindset of “he who can do more can do less”. Thus, the priest can do everything a deacon can do and more. When there is no deacon present at liturgical services, the diaconal functions are assumed either by the priest or lay servers, or lay readers. At more solemn services among the Eastern Catholics it was not uncommon for a priest to vest as a deacon and serve as such. This was the common practice in the Latin West also, for there is an understanding in Western theology that the priest is still a deacon after ordination to the presbyterate. (This matter is still to be addressed fully in Catholic theology and liturgical practice. This is not only a sacramental matter but also one that goes to the heart of the apostolic ministerial practice, pneumatology and ecclesiology.)

Thus, we can see that a number of diverse factors and historical contingencies led to the reality of the diaconate as a permanent order in the Eastern Catholic Churches as well as some of the Orthodox Churches being little more than a vestige. What was established by the Apostles as part of the apostolic ministry had atrophied in most local Churches into little more than a transitional period for the purpose of fulfilling a canonical obligation. The liturgical tradition as exemplified in the texts bore witness to an active diaconate but the reality was something quite different. This certainly raises serious questions about the self-consciousness of the Church. It seems that the bishops of Vatican II were acutely aware of the need to address this matter and as we will see their reasons were rooted in the patristic witness to the apostolic Church.

May 22, 2012

Since there is often considerable confusion in regards to what diaconal ecclesiastical dress is to be, especially in regards to "permanent" deacons, the following is offered as a clerification from a canonical perspective.

(Vespers: St. Elias, Brampton. Photo: M.L. Turi)

The Code of Canon Law in Can. 284 reads: Clerics are to wear suitable ecclesiastical dress, in accordance with the norms established by the Bishops’ Conference and legitimate local custom.

Are deacons clerics? Yes. Ordination to the diaconate in the Latin Church enrolls one as a cleric.

Are deacons to wear “suitable ecclesiastical dress”? Yes but see below for the exemption.

Who determines the “suitable ecclesiastical dress”? The particular Bishop’s Conference.

Is there a universal law that imposes a uniform ecclesiastical dress? No.

What are the norms established by the NCCB?

The National Conference of Catholic Bishops (US) in its norms for implementing the Code of Canon Law states: Outside liturgical functions, a black suit and Roman collar are the usual attire for priests. The use of the cassock is at the discretion of the cleric.

Can the general law or the particular law, prohibit permanent deacons from wearing “suitable ecclesiastical dress”? Not at present. If a cleric is prohibited from wearing ecclesiastical dress such a prohibition is to be interpreted as a penalty.

What Can. 288 does is give a general dispensation from ecclesiastical dress to permanent deacons unless the particular law removes the dispensation and requires permanent deacons to wear ecclesiastical dress.

Neither the NCCB nor the local bishop has authority in law to prohibit a permanent deacon from wearing suitable ecclesiastical dress. Universal law imposes the obligation to wear such dress. The NCCB and the local bishop can determine the type of ecclesiastical dress, which the NCCB has done. They can give dispensations but they cannot overthrow the general law. This is a basic principal in law: the laws at a higher level bind a lawmaker; general laws supersede particular law.

The Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches in Can. 387 reads: Particular law is to be observed in regard to the attire of clerics.

(His Holiness Patriarch Kyrill of Moscow on the left, His Beatitude Jerome, Archbishop of Athens and all Greece on the right, behind and between them Archdeacon Epiphanius Arvanitis. This photo is a good exhibit of current ecclesiastical dress or attire in the Byzantine tradition. Photo: partriarchia.ru)

There is no dispensation for permanent deacons in the Eastern Catholic Churches from ecclesiastical dress at a general level as there is for Roman Catholic permanent deacons. No such dispensation exists at present in the particular law of the Ukrainian Catholic Church. The Instruction for Applying the Liturgical Prescriptions of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, No. 66 reads in part: As for the non-liturgical dress of the clergy, it is appropriate that the individual Churches sui iuris return to the style of the traditional Eastern usage. In this author’s opinion No. 66 implies that permanent deacons in the Eastern Catholic Churches should wear the ecclesiastical dress of their Orthodox brethren.

The particular law of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church (April 7, 2015) No. 62. states, "At all official ecclesiastical or state functions the clerical attire is the under-cassock unless the eparchial bishop determines otherwise." I take this to be the minimum, i.e. the anterior or under-cassock. No mention is made of the exorason.

May 12, 2012

Orientalium ecclesiarum or the Decree on the Eastern Catholic Churches of November 21, 1964 presents the diaconate in a somewhat different perspective than Lumen gentium No 29. The reader is asked to reflect on the text including the footnotes. There will appear a commentary in the near future.

(St. Roman, the Sweet Singer)

17. In order that the ancient established practice of the sacrament of orders in the eastern churches may flourish again, this sacred council ardently desires that the office of the permanent diaconate should, where it has fallen into disuse, be restored.(21) The legislative authorities of each individual church should decide about the subdiaconate and the minor orders and the rights and obligations that attach to them.(22)

Footnote 21 (Note that this footnote refers to six separate sources. Orientalium ecclesiarum does not provide the actual texts. They are provides below for the convenience of the reader.)

(1) Nicaea I, canon 18. AD 325

It has come to the attention of this holy and great synod that in some places and cities deacons give communion to presbyters, although neither canon nor custom allows this, namely that those who have no authority to offer should give the body of Christ to those who do offer. Moreover it has become known that some of the deacons now receive the Eucharist even before the bishops. All these practices must be suppressed. Deacons must remain within their own limits, knowing that they are the ministers of the bishop and subordinate to the presbyters. Let them receive the Eucharist according to their order after the presbyters from the hands of the bishop or the presbyter. Nor shall permission be given for the deacons to sit among the presbyters, for such an arrangement is contrary to the canon and to rank. If anyone refuses to comply even after these decrees, he is to be suspended from the diaconate.

(2) Synod of Neocaesarea, canon 12, AD 314-325

If any one be baptized when he is ill, forasmuch as his [profession of] faith was not voluntary, but of necessity [i.e. though fear of death] he cannot be promoted to the presbyterate, unless on account of his subsequent [display of] zeal and faith, and because of a lack of men.

(3) Synod of Sardica, canon 8, AD 343

Greek: Bishop Hosius said: This also let your sagacity determine, that — inasmuch as this was decreed in order that a bishop might not fall under censure by going to the Court— that if any have such petitions as we mentioned above, they should send these by one of their deacons. For the person of a subordinate does not excite jealousy, and what shall be granted [by the Emperor] can thus be reported more quickly. All answered: Be this also decreed.

Latin: Bishop Hosius said: This also your forethought should provide for— inasmuch as you have made this decree in order that the audacity of bishops might not labour [or, be observed] to go to Court. Whosoever therefore shall have or receive petitions such as we have mentioned above, let them send these [each] by a deacon of his, because the person of a minister is not an object of jealousy, and he will be able to report more quickly what he has obtained.

I. He is pleased to have been consulted by the bishops of Illyricum on important questions.

The brotherly love of our colleagues makes us read with grateful mind the letters of all priests; for in them we embrace one another in the spirit as if we were face to face, and by the intercourse of such epistles we are associated in mutual converse. But in this present letter the affection displayed seems to us greater than usual: for it informs us of the state of the churches, and urges us to a vigilant exercise of care by a consideration of our office, so that being placed, as it were, on a watch-tower, according to the will of the Lord, we should both lend our approval to things when they run in accordance with our wishes, and correct, by applying the remedies of compulsion, what we observe gone wrong through any aggression: hoping that abundant fruit will be the result of our sowing the seed, if we do not allow those things to increase which have begun to spring up to the spoiling of the harvest.

II. Following the examples of his predecessors he nominates Anastasius metropolitan of Illyricum.

Now therefore, dear brother, that your request has been made known to us through our son Nicolaus the priest, that you, too, like your predecessors, might receive from us in our turn authority over Illyricum for the observance of the rules, we give our consent and earnestly exhort that no concealment and no negligence may be allowed in the management of the churches situated throughout Illyricum, which we commit to you in our stead, following the precedent of Siricius of blessed remembrance, who then, for the first time, acting on a fixed method, entrusted them to your last predecessor but one, Anysius of holy memory, who had at the time well deserved of the Apostolic See, and was approved by after events: that he might render assistance to the churches situated in that province whom he wished kept up to discipline. Noble precedents must be followed with eagerness that we may show ourselves in all things like those whose privileges we wish to enjoy. We wish you to imitate your last predecessor but one as well as of your immediate predecessor who is known equally with the former to have both deserved and employed this privilege: so that we may rejoice in the progress of the churches which we commit to you in our stead. For as the conduct of matters progresses creditably when committed to one who acts well and carries out skillfully the duties of the priestly position, so it is found to be only a burden to him who, when power is entrusted to him, uses not the moderation that is due.

III. Ordinees must be carefully selected with especial reference to the canons of the church.

And so, dear brother, hold with vigilance the helm entrusted to you, and direct your mind's gaze around on all which you see put in your charge, guarding what will conduce to your reward and resisting those who strive to upset the discipline of the canons. The sanction of God's law must be respected, and the decrees of the canons should be more especially kept. Throughout the provinces committed to thee let such priests be consecrated to the Lord as are commended only by their deserving life and position among the clergy. Permit no licence to personal favour, nor to canvassing, nor to purchased votes. Let the cases of those who are to be ordained be investigated carefully and let them be trained in the discipline of the Church through a considerable period of their life. But if all the requirements of the holy fathers are found in them, and if they have observed all that we read the blessed Apostle Paul to have enjoined on such, viz., that he be the husband of one wife, and that she was a virgin when he married her, as the authority of God’s law requires,[then ordain them]. And this we are extremely anxious should be observed, so as to do away with all place for excuses, lest any one should believe himself able to attain to the priesthood who has taken a wife before he obtained the grace of Christ, and on her decease joined himself to another after baptism. Seeing that the former wife cannot be ignored, nor the previous marriage put out of the reckoning, and that he is as much the father of the children whom he begot by that wife before baptism as he is of those whom he is known to have begotten by the second after baptism. For as sins and things which are known to be unlawful are washed away in the font of baptism, so what are allowed or lawful are not done away.

IV. The metropolitans must not ordain hastily nor without consulting their primate.

Let no one be ordained a priest throughout these churches inconsiderately; for by this means ripe judgments will be formed about those to be elected, if your scrutiny, brother, is dreaded. But let any bishop who, contrary to our command, is ordained by his metropolitan without your knowledge, know that he has no assured position with us, and that those who have taken on themselves so to do must render an account of their presumption. But as to each metropolitan is committed such power that he has the right of ordaining in his province, so we wish those metropolitans to be ordained, but not without ripe and well-considered judgment. For although it is seemly that all who are consecrated priests should be approved and well-pleasing to God, yet we wish those to have peculiar excellence whom we know are going to preside over the fellow-priests who are assigned to them. And we admonish you, beloved, to see to this the more diligently and carefully, that you may be proved to keep that precept of the Apostles which runs, "lay hands suddenly on no man."

V. Points which cannot be settled at the provincial synod are to be referred to Rome.

Any of the brethren who has been summoned to a synod should attend and not deny himself to the holy congregation: for there especially he should know that what will conduce to the good discipline of the church must be settled. For all faults will be better avoided if more frequent conferences take place between the priests of the Lord, and intimate association is the greatest help alike to improvement and to brotherly love. There, if any questions arise, under the Lord’s guidance they will be able to be determined, so that no bad feeling remains, and only a firmer love exists among the brethren. But if any more important questions spring up, such as cannot be settled there under your presidency, brother, send your report and consult us, so that we may write back under the revelation of the Lord, of whose mercy it is that we can do ought, because He has breathed favourably upon us: that by our decision we may vindicate our right of cognizance in accordance with old-established tradition and the respect that is due to the Apostolic See: for as we wish you to exercise your authority in our stead, so we reserve to ourselves points which cannot be decided on the spot and persons who have made appeal to us.

VI. Priests and deacons may not be ordained on weekdays any more than bishops.

You shall take order that this letter reach the knowledge of all the brethren, so that no one hereafter find an opportunity to excuse himself through ignorance in observing these things which we command. We have directed our letter of admonition to the metropolitans themselves also of the several provinces, that they may know that they must obey the Apostolic injunctions, and that they obey us in beginning to obey you, brother, our delegate according to what we have written. We hear, indeed, and we cannot pass it over in silence, that only bishops are ordained by certain brethren on Sundays only; but presbyters and deacons, whose consecration should be equally solemn, receive the dignity of the priestly office indiscriminately on any day, which is a reprehensible practice contrary to the canons and tradition of the fathers, since the custom ought by all means to be kept by those who have received it with respect to all the sacred orders: so that after a proper lapse of time he who is to be ordained a priest or deacon may be advanced through all the ranks of the clerical office, and thus a man may have time to learn that of which he himself also is one day to be a teacher.

Dated the 12th of January, in the consulship of Theodosius (18th time) and Albinus(444).

(Please note the discrepancy in the dating of the letter by one day.)

(St. Lawrence the Martyr)

(5) Chalcedon, canon 6, AD 451

No one, whether presbyter or deacon or anyone at all who belongs to the ecclesiastical order, is to be ordained without title, unless the one ordained is specially assigned to a city or village church or to a martyr’s shine or a monastery. The sacred synod has decreed that the ordination of those ordained without title is null, and that they cannot operate anywhere, because of the presumption of the one who ordained them.

(6) Constantinople IV, canon 23 AD 869-870

We have also learnt that some bishops, at the request of certain people, have unreasonably made a gift of properties belonging to other churches. Thus they usurp the authority of other bishops, so far as they can. This conduct will clearly bring on them the curse of the prophet who says, Woe to those who add house to house and field to field (Is 5:8) in order to defraud their neighbor, and it has made them guilty of sacrilege. For this reason this great and universal synod had decided that no brother of ours in the episcopate or anyone else may transact such a wicked property deal, nor, if asked by someone dispose of any property belonging to other churches, nor install priests or any other clerics in churches that are not under his jurisdiction, without the permission of the bishop responsible for the church in question. Furthermore, no priests or deacons, who are consecrated for holy functions, should perform, of their own accord and decision, any sacred functions in churches to which they have not been appointed from the beginning. This behavior is unlawful and utterly alien to the canonical regulations.

Whoever, after this declaration of ours, shall be seen to do any of these things which have now been forbidden, must be excommunicated for a period of time, and the contractual arrangements, whether written or not, must be completely dissolved and abrogated because they were made in contravention of the canons. Likewise, the priest or deacon is to be suspended until he withdraws from the church to which he does not belong. But if he ignores the suspension, he must be got rid of completely and dispossessed of every sacred office.

Canon 26

This holy synod has also decided that any priest or deacon who has been disposed by his bishop for some crime, or who alleges he has suffered some kind of injustice and is not satisfied with the judgment of his bishop, saying that he does not trust him and that he has been wronged, either because of the enmity which the bishop has for him or because of favours the bishop wants to bestow on certain others, such a person has the right to have recourse to the metropolitan of his province and to denounce his deposition from office, which he thinks is unjust, or any other injury. The metropolitan should be willing to take up such cases and to summon the bishop who has deposed the cleric or injured him in any way. He should examine the case himself, with the help or other bishops, so as either to confirm the deposition of the cleric beyond all doubt, or to quash it by means of a general synod and the judgment of many persons.

In the same way we decree that bishops may have recourse to the patriarch, their head, if they complain that they have suffered similar things from their metropolitan, so that the business in question may receive a just and right decision from their patriarch and the metropolitans under him. No metropolitan bishop may be judged by his neighbouring metropolitan bishops, even though it is alleged that he has committed serious crimes, but he may only be judged by his own patriarch; we decree that this judgment will be just and beyond suspicion because a number of esteemed people will be gathered around the patriarch, and for this reason his judgment will be fully ratified and confirmed. If anyone does not agree with what we have promulgated, let him be excommunicated.

(Protodeacon Alexander Ageikin. Photo: patriarchia.ru)

Footnote 22: In many eastern churches the subdiaconate is regarded as a minor order; but in Pius XII’s Motu proprio Cleri sanctitati the obligations of the major orders were prescribed for it. The present canon proposes a return to the ancient rule of each church as regards the obligations of subdeacons, in derogation of the common law of Cleri sanctitati.

(The presentation of the Book of the Gospels at an ordination to the diaconate; Roman Rite.)

This table provides a quick overview of diaconal liturgical functions in the various Churches of the Catholic communion, and shows where they are the same and where they are not. Lumen Gentium 29, certainly seems to extend all these functions to all deacons regardless of their particular Church with the following provision: “in so far as it may be assigned to him by the competent authority”. A deacon must follow the liturgical prescriptions of his own particular Church. The Eastern Catholic Churches by tradition have not assigned to the deacon solemn baptism, the blessing of marriages (such marriages would be invalid, even if a deacon of the Latin Church attempted to give the blessing), presiding at worship, administration of sacramental, and officiating at funerals.

We can also see that there was a greater similarity in diaconal liturgical functions between East and West prior to Vatican II.

January 01, 2012

It is best to begin our inquiry with an understanding of the canonical term faculty. In a general sense a “faculty” is the power or authorization to perform an act lawfully. When the term bi-ritual appears, it refers to a cleric who has been ordained to serve in a particular Church sui iuris, let us say the Ukrainian Greek Catholic, who is also serving in another Church sui iuris, let us say the Roman Catholic. There needs to be a clear distinction between clerics who act as celebrants or preside, and those who do not. We also need to determine in regards to deacons, what is the act that the deacon is to perform? Depending on the act, we will be able to determine what faculties if any are needed other than those granted under universal law at the time of ordination.

(Presumably an archdeacon for he wears the black kamilavka and the double orarion. Photo: patriarchia.ru)

There are general faculties given from the time of ordination that may be used anywhere in the world with at least the presumed consent of the eparchial bishop, pastor of the parish, or rector of the church. For deacons these faculties are articulated in various documents. For deacons in the Eastern Catholic Churches the following are foundational:

Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches.

Instruction for Applying the Liturgical Prescriptions of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches.

Particular laws of each Church sui iuris.

The official liturgical books of each Church sui iuris. In these books the liturgical functions of the deacon are set forth.

The laws governing the general faculties for deacons in the Latin rites are quite different in these particular areas, especially in regards to liturgical functions.

At ordination a deacon of an Eastern Catholic Church by virtue of the ordination receives the following faculties for use in his own Church:

He may delivery the homily at the discretion of the celebrant according to the norm of particular law (Can. 614 §4).

He may assist the celebrant at Divine Liturgy and all other liturgical services as indicated in the official liturgical texts (Cans. 674 §1, 699 §2).

He may distribute the Divine Eucharist according to the norm of particular law (Can. 709 §1).

He may bring and distribute the Divine Eucharist to the sick and infirm according to the norm of particular law (Can. 709 §1).

He may baptize in case of necessity. (Can. 677 §2)

(Deacons assist Pope Benedict XVI)

Does the deacon need faculties to serve at Divine Liturgy in a Church sui iuris other than the one for whom he was ordained?

Can. 701 of the Code of Canons for the Eastern Churches will be able to provide some guidance on this matter. It reads as follows:

“A concelebration between bishops and presbyters of different Churches sui iuris for a just cause, especially that of fostering charity, and for the sake of manifesting unity between the Churches, can be done with the permission of the eparchial bishop, while observing all the prescriptions of the liturgical books of the principal celebrant, having removed any liturgical syncretism and wearing the appropriate vestments and insignia of his own Church sui iuris.”

This canon implies that permission from the eparchial bishop is required for bishops and presbyters to concelebrate in a different Church sui iuris. There is no mention of deacons in this canon for strictly speaking deacons do not concelebrate but rather serve or assist as ministers. Concelebration properly speaking presumes at least some sharing in the presidential role of the principal celebrant. The same permission from the eparchial bishop would be required for deacons to assist or serve in the proper diaconal role at a Divine Liturgy in a different Church sui iuris other than his own. The ecclesial principal here is that clerics belong to a particular Church and are not lone rangers doing their own thing. It is also the duty of the bishop to oversee all liturgical services in his eparchy. We can also derive from this canon that the deacon from the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church would wear the vestments proper to his own tradition, namely, sticharion, orarion, and epimanikia, and not the vesture of a Roman Catholic deacon, namely, amice, alb, cincture, stole, and dalmatic. It is also clear that there is to be no syncretism of rites and that the liturgical books of the principal celebrant are to be followed. Permission does not need to be on an individual basis but can be given generally by the bishop for all clerics in his eparchy or diocese for occasional services that does not require specific faculties that are not granted at the time of ordination.

If the deacon has the permission of the bishops of the different Churches sui iuris no more is needed to serve as deacon in a different Church. There are no actions of the deacon during the Divine Liturgy that require faculties other than what is given in universal law and are acquired with ordination to the diaconate. If the pastor of a parish or the rector of a church invites a deacon of a rite other than his own to serve on a particular occasion, it should be presumed that this is in accordance with the eparchial or diocesan bishop. However, if a deacon were to serve regularly at the Divine Liturgy or Mass, the deacon would need the permission both of his own bishop and the bishop in the eparchy or diocese of the different Church sui iuris. Regularly, would mean more than occasionally. It might be only once per month but if it usually occurs every month, then it is regular. Yet, if a deacon did attend a funeral, a baptism, or a marriage and he was invited to assist the celebrant as a deacon, this would be occasional.

A Roman Catholic deacon who has certain faculties that permit him to preside in the Roman Catholic Church may not preside in any of the Eastern Catholic Churches. He would be permitted to do no more than the law permits an Eastern Catholic deacon to do. This is outlined in numbers 1-6 as listed above.

An Eastern Catholic deacon who serves regularly in the Roman Catholic Church would need to obtain faculties from the local Roman Catholic bishop with the permission of his own eparch if he was to do anything other than occasionallyassist at Mass, Vespers, Benediction, etc. The key term here is occasionallyassist. As long as the Eastern Catholic deacon does not preside or celebrate and only occasionally assists in a Church sui iuris other than his own, he does not need bi-ritual faculties.

Unlike the Roman Catholic deacon, the Eastern Catholic deacon may not licitly baptize (except in the case of necessity and never solemnly). He may not preside at any liturgical services, nor celebrate minor exorcisms, blessings of catechumens, celebrate non-sacramental penitential services, preside at funeral rites, impart blessings, celebrate sacramentals, “assist” i.e. preside at marriages in the name of the Church, grant dispensations, depute catechists, designated extra-ordinary ministers of Holy Communion, or delegate to lay ministers what is permitted by law.

Furthermore we read in Can. 674 §2:

“The minister should celebrate the sacraments according to the liturgical prescriptions of his own Church sui iuris, unless the law establishes otherwise or he himself has obtained a special faculty from the Apostolic See.”

In this canon, “minister” refers to bishops and presbyters. Since deacons in the Eastern Catholic Churches are never strictly speaking “the minister” of the sacraments for they do not act as the celebrant but rather assist the celebrant, there is no need for them to obtain faculties beyond what the universal law grants to them at the time of ordination, unless the particular law prescribes otherwise.

A final note: it is presupposed that a deacon serving in a Church sui iuris for which he was not ordained will thoroughly know how to serve in the rite of the different Church sui iuris even if it is only occasionally. If he does not have the competence to do such, it would most likely be better that he does not assist.

The author is of the opinion that if a deacon assists a celebrant in a rite other than his own and it is only occasionally, the deacon does not need bi-ritual faculties as long as the hierarchical permission can be at least presumed. However, such faculties are need if the diaconal service is regular.

December 28, 2011

(Mosaic from San Vitale, Revenna. To the left of Bishop Maximian are deacons; one hold the Gospel Book and the other a censer both attributes of the diaconate. Photo: source unknown)

The ministry of the word is entrusted to deacons both within the liturgy and outside of it. It is given to the deacon to chant the Holy Scriptures, especially the Gospel at the Divine Liturgy. The words of Scripture bear witness to the one true Word of the Father that is Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. It is fundamental that we never loose sight of the reality that Christians are not “people of the book” but rather encounter and experience the Word of God as a living person, namely, the second Person of the Holy Trinity. The Word of God is not something written on a page but the One Word of the Father spoken from all eternity. He is a life giving and life creating Word. The words of Holy Scripture bear witness and testify to the One True Word, Jesus Christ.

In what ways does the deacon instruct and exhort the faithful?

A: In Liturgical Services:

1. by the chanting of the Holy Scriptures

2. by his bearing and attitude while serving

3. by acting as a model of liturgical participation

4. by acting as an image of Christ as servant

5. by preaching the homily

6. through exhortatory commands, e.g. “Let us be attentive.”

B: Through

evangelization

catechesis

mystagogy.

C: By preaching always by the way in which he acts not only within the liturgical services, but especially outside of them. He should be recognized as one who lives in Christ by what he does.

Every deacon must be engaged in the ministry of the Word. It is not acceptable for a deacon to serve only in liturgical services and not be engaged with the ministry of the Word outside of the liturgy. Yet it can be seen that the ministry of the Word is not exclusively about words, for it is in some ways much more about living. This however does not exclude deacons from the responsibility of being properly trained to preach, instruct and teach through the usual modes of delivery.

In order to be a minister of the Word it is necessary to experience the Word in one’s own life. The deacon himself must have been evangelized if he is to evangelize.

Evangelization is the proclamation of the “good news” that the Kingdom of God is at hand. A response is required to this proclamation. Ideally, the response is a “metanoia”, that is a change of mind, a change of attitude, a change of heart. Once a person believes that the Kingdom of God is at hand, that is here and now, a person is confronted with a choice: “Do I live in the Kingdom or not?” If I choose to live in the Kingdom, then I must repent, i.e. I can no longer live in the kingdom of the world if I am to live in the Kingdom of God. These two are not compatible. This is not because God has disowned the world but because the world as experience has fallen into sin. The world is disordered and everything in it, including myself has been disordered by sin.

To be evangelized is to hear in the depth of the heart what Christ has done by means of the Paschal Mystery, and has fulfilled the plan of the Father’s economy of salvation, and accept that one now lives in the Kingdom of God animated and enlivened by the Holy Spirit. But to hear is not enough. The gift of salvation is given but it must also be received. And to receive the gift of salvation requires a change in “life style”. In the pre-baptismal rites, the candidate is asked three times: “Do you reject Satan, and all his works, and all his angels, and all his service, and all his pride?” If I live according to the ways of the world, then I have not rejected Satan and his kingdom. Note that evangelization is the proclamation of Kingdom of God. It is not an instruction in the faith, (strictly speaking this is catechesis), nor an entry into the mysteries (mystagogy). When a person has heard the Good News they must make a choice. The parable of the sower gives the paradigm for evangelization. (Lk 8:4-15) Those who hear the Word of God and persevere have been evangelized. The deacon is to sow the seed wherever he goes. All need to hear the Good News.

Catechesis is directed to those who have already been evangelized. Catechesis is instruction in the faith for believers, for those who have already heard the Good News and have repented. Those who have been evangelized even if not initiated into the Church by baptism, chrismation and the Holy Eucharist should already be living their lives in Christ. They should have adopted the Way: repentance, prayer, fasting, alms giving, and be actively engaged in the spiritual warfare with the unruly passions that lead to sin, namely gluttony, fornication, avarice, anger, sadness, acedia, vainglory, and pride. In all of this, guidance is needed and deacons can be active guides for those seeking to live in the Way.

Formal catechesis is necessary for developing a mature Christian life. It should be founded upon the Holy Scriptures and the teachings of the Fathers, the councils, the liturgical life (which is primary theology), the lives of the saints, and the teaching of the magisterium. Catechesis should encompass not only doctrine, but also the moral life in Christ, the active liturgical life, and prayer. The place for this catechesis is primarily outside of the liturgy, for catechesis is didactic and instructional while liturgy is an act of sacrifice, thanksgiving, anamnesis, praise, repentance, and adoration: liturgy is doxological.

Mystagogy is that preaching that leads one into the mysteries (sacraments). Mystagogy reveals how one has rejected Satan and has put on Christ, how one has been stripped of the old Adam and now lives in the new Adam. Mystagogy makes known through sign and symbol how we “commend ourselves and one another and our whole life to Christ our God”. Mystagogy is an entry into the reality where Christ is “all in all”. (Col 3:11) Mystagogy rather than evangelization or catechesis is the type of preaching most applicable to the homily to be given at liturgical services. Mystagogy should be founded in this: “Let your thoughts be on heavenly things, not on the things that are on earth, because you have died, and now the life you have is hidden with Christ in God. But when Christ is revealed – and he is your life – you too will be revealed in all your glory with him.” (Col 3:2-4)

(Dormition Cathedral, Kremlin, Moscow. Photo: patriarchia.ru)

What do the canons say about deacons preaching?

Can. 608 Bishops, presbyters and deacons, each one according to the grade of his sacred order, have as their foremost duty the ministry of the word of God, which is to be exercised according to the norm or law; the other faithful, according to each one’s aptitude, state of life and received mandate, are to take part willingly in this ministry.

(Deacons should note that the ministry of the word of God is a foremost duty. No deacon is exempt from this obligation, an obligation that should be a joy.)

Can. 609 The eparchial bishop is to supervise the preaching of the word of God in his territory, in keeping with common law.

Can. 610 §1. Bishops have the right to preach the word of God everywhere, unless the eparchial bishop in a special case expressly forbids it.

§2. Presbyters have the faculty to preach where they are legitimately sent or invited.

§3. Deacons too have the same faculty, unless particular law has determined otherwise.

(The particular law of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church states in Can. 75 “Deacons too have the same faculty to preach where they are legitimately assigned.” This is more restrictive than the law for presbyters, which reads “legitimately sent or invited.”)

§4. In extraordinary circumstance, especially to supply for the scarcity of clerics, the eparchial bishop also may give the mandate to preach even in church to other Christian faithful, observing can. 614, §4.

In regards to the homily Can. 614 §4. reads: The homily is reserved to the bishop or priest or, according to particular law, also to the deacon. The particular law of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church states: Can. 76 “The homily is reserved to a priest or also to a deacon with the approval of the bishop.” This means that each deacon needs to be given a faculty to preach the homily unless the bishop has created a general law for his eparchy that allows all deacons to preach the homily.

This raises the question as to when the deacon should give the homily. It seems from customary liturgical practice, the presiding celebrant has as a part of his liturgical ministry, the delivery of the homily, be this at Divine Liturgy, Vespers, Matins, baptism, crowning in marriage, funeral, etc. For the deacon, the homily is not the usual and ordinary part of his liturgical ministry. Yet, there are times when it is appropriate for the deacon to be blessed by the presiding celebrant to give the homily. I might suggest the following in a parish where the usual course of services are followed on a weekend, i.e. Vespers, Matins, and Divine Liturgy that a deacon delivers the homily once per month or about every four weeks. (This is a parish in which there is one presbyter and one deacon.) The reason for such a schedule is that is provides a diversity of charisma to be manifested in the Divine Liturgy. These charismata are given by God and should be allowed to flourish for the building up of the Body of Christ.

(The Holy Protomartyr and Archdeacon Stephen. Photo: source unknown)

What is the necessary training in order to preach?

The particular law of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church states in Can. 1010 §2. If it is a case of a candidate who is not destined for the priesthood, it is permitted to ordain him a deacon only after successful completion of the third year of studies, which is mentioned in CCEO can 354: if, however, it happens that this candidate is admitted to the priesthood in the future, then he must first complete the theological studies and spiritual formation, prior to ordination.

From this canon it can be seen that a thorough theological education, spiritual formation and liturgical training must preceded ordination to the diaconate. Unfortunately, many deacons have been ordained without this education, training and formation. This often impedes the individual deacon’s ability to preach whether in regards to evangelization, catechesis, or mystagogy. Due to the lack of training, education, and formation, many deacons cannot and (should not) fulfill the ministry of the word. It is incumbent upon those that train, educate and form those men who present themselves for the ministry of the diaconate that such training, education, and formation is as a minimum sufficient for the duties that a deacon will undertake. Because there has been an attitude that the diaconate is a mini-priesthood, that it is part-time, etc. there has been insufficient training, formation and education of candidates for the diaconate. The foundation for such an approach has been corrupted and undermines the true and authentic diaconate. Let us remember that many deacons have served the Church as outstanding theologians: Athanasius of Alexandria, Ephrem the Syrian, Gregory the Great, Alcuin of York, etc. The deacon must be trained, formed and educated in such a manner that he can be an effective and enthusiastic minister of the Word.